Illaiyakumar v. The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.10.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Illaiyakumar ... Petitioner Vs.
The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Chennai City, Chennai (Crime No.167 of 2024).
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in Crime No.167 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.S.S.Pillai For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinothkumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The petitioner/A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.07.2024, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 1/6
420, 465, 467, 468 of I.P.C r/w 66 (D) IT Act,2008 in Crime No.167 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant through a whatsapp group, joined the share market investment. Believing the accused's claim of a 300% profit, the defacto complainant invested Rs.1,70,53,937/-. When attempted to withdraw the amount, the defacto came to know that the accused has cheated him. Hence, the case.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. He further submits that the co-accused/A1 was already granted bail by this Court. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody from 19.07.2024 and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that there are totally two accused in this case and 2/6
the petitioner herein is arrayed as A2. He further submits that the defacto complainant through a whatsapp group, joined the share market investment. Believing the accused's claim of a 300% profit, the defacto complainant invested Rs.1,70,53,937/-. When attempted to withdraw the amount, the defacto came to know that the accused has cheated him. He further submits that this petitioner has received Rs.10 lakh as a commission and nearly 50 lakhs amount was transferred to different accounts. He further submits that the petitioner has no previous case pending against him. He further submitted that the investigation was almost completed. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
6. Considering the nature of offence, the petitioner has no previous case, pending against him, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, co-accused was also released on bail, investigation was completed and also considering all others factors, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. 3/6
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai-01 and on further conditions that:- [a] the petitioner shall report before the concerned Jurisdictional Magistrate on all working days at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [b] the Petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;
[c] the Petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
[d] the Petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against 4/6
the Petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; and [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
18.10.2024 drl To 1.The XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai-01 2.The Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Police Station, Chennai City, Chennai 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal -2, Chennai.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
P.DHANABAL, J.
5/6
drl 18.10.2024 6/6